AJMER SINGH Vs. NISHI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 29-4-1982 passed by Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, vide which the appeal filed by the plaintiff Nishi Kumar (respondent No. 1 herein) was accepted and his suit for possession of the land in dispute, which was dismissed by the learned trial Court, was decreed.

(2.) The plaintiff instituted the present suit for possession against the defendants on 18-5-1978. His case was that he was owner of the land in dispute measuring 16 Kanals, which was sold to the defendants vide registered sale deed dated 23-5-1974 for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/-. At the time of execution of the said sale deed, the defendants paid only Rs. 9,000/- and it was agreed that the remaining amount of Rs. 6,000/- would be paid by the defendants by 22-5-1975. In the event of non-payment of the aforesaid amount by the defendants, it was agreed that the sale made by the said document in favour of the defendants would be deemed to be cancelled. It was also agreed that the defendants would not be entitled to get mutation of the land in question sanctioned in their favour without payment of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 6,000/-; and if any such mutation was sanctioned, the same would be illegal and would not confer any right of ownership on the defendants. However, possession of the land in question was handed over to the defendants after the execution of the sale deed. It was pleaded that the defendants did not make payment of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 6,000/- as agreed by them in the sale deed, in spite of asking for the same by the plaintiff. Hence, the instant suit for possession of the land in question was filed.

(3.) In the written statement filed by the defendants, it was admitted that they purchased the land in question for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/- vide registered sale deed dated 23-5-1974. It was also admitted that only an amount of Rs. 9,000/- was paid by them at the time of registration of the sale deed and the remaining amount of Rs. 6,000/- was agreed to be paid by 22-5-1975. It was, however, alleged that the defendants paid the aforesaid amount of Rs. 6,000/- to the plaintiff on 21-11-1974 against a receipt. It was further alleged that they were absolute owners of the land in question and the plaintiff was having no right or title in the same and the suit filed by him was sought to be dismissed.